This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.

Dismiss

Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?

You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.

One reason things have being going so well for Boeing Co. shareholders: The airplane giant hasn’t tried to build a new type of plane lately. That looks about to change. Next year, Boeing is likely to decide whether to start developing its first new airliner in 15 years. Investors would be right to worry. New planes are hugely risky, in terms of cost and design and predictions of market demand years in advance. Boeing’s last big bet was the 787, which launched in 2003, cost $30 billion and only… (www.wsj.com) More...

This article would indicate that the 797 would be a truncated 787 which would mean many of the development costs and technology have already been developed ....essentially it would not be a new airplane.

If one were to think this through Boeing's competitors in not just Airbus, but their own 757 which continues to provide yeoman service to that market segment. The new aircraft will have to show significant economies considering the 757 fleets are already capitalized in order for the market to buy them as replacements. There will also have to be a significant additional market for this 787-500.

This is when airlines has just begun retiring their A321/A320 fleets. Also is when some A330s will be replaced as well. There is a huge market if the airline doesn't have fleet plans for 2019-2021. The A321 originally competed with the 757, so when airlines retire them without further plans the NMA could just fit in to the fleet, providing that its equipment is proven in use, wouldn't want another battery incident...

Thanks for the post. Boeing should keep the signature 757 designation and increase the variant number instead of using the 797 designation. I’m thinking 757-500(ER) or something to that tune. The public and the investors would feel like a different variant of the original model is being sought versus a new aircraft being created.

Boeing got a blood bath with the 787 which still has to show a single cent in profits but it learned a lesson the bloody way. It they embark on a new aircraft project chances are that it is going to be a well thought out thing and will make plenty of money.

from a recent experience on a 757 flight, American seem to be trying to replace them. they really do not have the range for their transatlantic use especially in winter with adverse winds. i was told on a flight that they had to land in Goose Bay often to pick up fuel, and as they did not have sufficient other planes they were discontinuing the ORD-MAN flights in winter, replacing them in summer with 767's.

Not really. The 757 has roughly 4,400 miles of range while the 321 only has about 3,700. The reason airlines are hesitant to let go of the 757 is that since it was able to qualify with ETOPS, it opened many transatlantic routes that would normally require a larger aircraft. If the capacity wasn't there to sustain the route, the flying of the larger aircraft presently a possibly insolvent route. Being able to use the 757 was the perfect solution. No plane fills the gap the 757 will leave behind.